THE WORLD TRADE CENTER
The collapse of both World Trade Center towers--and the smaller WTC 7 a few hours later--initially surprised even some experts. But subsequent studies have shown that the WTC's structural integrity was destroyed by intense fire as well as the severe damage inflicted by the planes. That explanation hasn't swayed conspiracy theorists, who contend that all three buildings were wired with explosives in advance and razed in a series of controlled demolitions.

Perfect landing at the Pentagon? Watch this flash presentation about flight 77 hitting the Pentagon. Huge explosion at the WTC.	The collapse of World Trade Center 7 is one huge smoking gun of 9/11. WTC 7 fell perfectly, as if the entire building structure failed all at once. Although you can see the very top of the building begins the collapse with a noticeable bowing, then penthouse starts down, followed by about 7 explosions moving up the right-hand corner, distinct explosions fractions of a second apart. Notice the way the top moves as if the center of the building is pulling the outside in toward the center. That is what you would expect to see in a controlled demolition, with the goal being to contain the debris within the foot print of the building. Like the Twin Towers building 7 falls at the rate of free fall, with little or no resistance. See More about Building 7. See More Here

For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert? Jet fuel does not melt structural steel, nor does it effect the load carrying capability significantly. The steel in the WTC towers was certified to ASTM E119 specification. Popular Mechanics can go buy some of this steel, load it to failure, then with another equal piece of the same steel, subject it to thermal stress from fire from jet fuel and then load it to failure, and compare the difference, if there is any it will negligible. According to Underwriters Laboratories Executive, who Speaks Out on WTC Study "The buildings should have easily withstood the thermal stress caused by pools of burning jet fuel." - Kevin Ryan
Kevin Ryan of UL goes on the say, "We know that the steel components were certified to ASTM E119 . The time temperature curves for this standard require the samples to be exposed to temperatures around 2000F for several hours. And as we all agree, the steel applied met those specifications. Additionally, I think we can all agree that even un-fireproofed steel will not melt until reaching red-hot temperatures of nearly 3000F (2). Why Dr. Brown would imply that 2000F would melt the high-grade steel used in those buildings makes no sense at all."
Further more, hydrocarbon fueled fires reach maximum temperatures of 1576F under ideal conditions, unless preheated or propelled, as in an oxyacetylene torch.
Read More
Kevin Ryan was fired by Underwriters Laboratories, in a very strange turn of events. Read More
06/12/2005: 9/11 Whistle blower Kevin Ryan, former Underwriters Laboratory Executive speaks out about the US government's official hypothesis on how the WTC towers came down. Read More

Yet another expert disagrees with the the FEMA experts.
By Joe Calderone
NY Daily News Chief of Investigations
"A respected fire fighting trade magazine with ties to the city Fire Department is calling for a "full-throttle, fully researched" investigation into the collapse of the World Trade Center. A signed editorial in the January issue of Fire Engineering magazine says the current investigation is "a half-baked farce." Bill Manning, editor Fire Engineering magazine. Read More

Widespread Damage
CLAIM: The first hijacked plane crashed through the 94th to the 98th floors of the World Trade Center's 110-story North Tower; the second jet slammed into the 78th to the 84th floors of the 110-story South Tower. The impact and ensuing fires disrupted elevator service in both buildings. Plus, the lobbies of both buildings were visibly damaged before the towers collapsed. "There is NO WAY the impact of the jet caused such widespread damage 80 stories below," claims a posting on the San Diego Independent Media Center Web site (sandiego.indymedia.org). "It is OBVIOUS and irrefutable that OTHER EXPLOSIVES (... such as concussion bombs) HAD ALREADY BEEN DETONATED in the lower levels of tower one at the same time as the plane crash."

There were, more than likely high energy secondary explosions at the WTC towers prior to the collapses, you can hear live mainstream news coverage that speak of the explosions here.
Listen to this audio file that has live news coverage about "secondary explosions" (right click and save target as) high band width or low band width there is no copyright, feel free to distribute it, or reproduce this site.
Hear a CNN live report on the Pentagon, "no plane crash anywhere near the Pentagon" they said. Listen to CNN Live report
Furthermore it is incredable that the 47 center support beams collapsed at the same speed as the rest of the building, and the pyroclastic cloud, free falling at a rate of speed with little more than air resistance, you can time that rate of speed with the videos. I- beams on end collapsing at the speed of free fall?

Now this is amazing, there were hot spots under the WTC ruble, very hot, hot enough to melt aluminum, and these hot spots persisted for 3 months after 9/11, and there were pools of melted steel. Explain the pools of molten steel burning 70 feet below street level for 100 days after 9-11. The existence of these burning pools of molten steel were confirmed by:
Mark Lorieux of Controlled Demolition, Inc
Peter Tully, President of Tully Construction
and the American Free Press newspaper
Read More
Hot spots under the WTC towers were detected by, Source: USGS Spectroscopy Lab The fires are too deep for firefighters to get to. [ABC News, 9/18/01]
Read More
Hot spots, pools of molten steel, and as has been established, you cant melt steel with jet fuel. The only conclusion Grassroots InfoMedia can come to on this, with sources such as the USGS, is that something happened, and the US government, and Popular Mechanics, are very deliberately covering it up, and what is even more amazing, all too many people are buying the lies.

This is a simplified diagram of the support beams in the WTC, can you imagine 47 of the beams in the center all collapsing, and at such a rapid speed? See more about the WTC Construction

FACT: Following up on a May 2002 preliminary report by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a major study will be released in spring 2005 by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), a branch of the U.S. Department of Commerce. NIST shared its initial findings with PM and made its lead researcher available to our team of reporters.

Fact: The US Government or more specifically, entities therein, are the suspects of the crime, quoting the suspects and portraying it as fact is ridiculous. PM just does not seem to understand that you can not use the testimony of the perpetrators as fact. Not to mention the question of liability, those who built the buildings, or may otherwise be associated with responsibility, may have conflicts of interest, and be motivated to skew facts to avoid civil suit.

The NIST investigation revealed that plane debris sliced through the utility shafts at the North Tower's core, creating a conduit for burning jet fuel--and fiery destruction throughout the building. "It's very hard to document where the fuel went," says Forman Williams, a NIST adviser and a combustion expert, "but if it's atomized and combustible and gets to an ignition source, it'll go off."

If it is atomized? How would it be, and to what extent, it does not atomized on it's own, that is why there are carburetors, and fuel injectors.

Burning fuel traveling down the elevator shafts would have disrupted the elevator systems and caused extensive damage to the lobbies. NIST heard first-person testimony that "some elevators slammed right down" to the ground floor. "The doors cracked open on the lobby floor and flames came out and people died," says James Quintiere, an engineering professor at the University of Maryland and a NIST adviser. A similar observation was made in the French documentary "9/11," by Jules and Gedeon Naudet. As Jules Naudet entered the North Tower lobby, minutes after the first aircraft struck, he saw victims on fire, a scene he found too horrific to film.


"Melted" Steel
CLAIM: "We have been lied to," announces the Web site AttackOnAmerica.net. "The first lie was that the load of fuel from the aircraft was the cause of structural failure. No kerosene fire can burn hot enough to melt steel." The posting is entitled "Proof Of Controlled Demolition At The WTC."

FACT:Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength--and that required exposure to much less heat. "I have never seen melted steel in a building fire," says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. "But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks."

"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.

As has been established, the steel used in the WTC towers was not just steel, it was ASTM E119 and according to the Underwriters Labratories executive, Kevin Ryan, would not have been stressed significantly by hydorcarbon fires.See UL conrtacts the
Read More
Learn more about contracts let to UL by NIST to test structural steel components identical to those used to build the WTC, ANSI/UL 263 (ASTM E119 and NFPA 251), “Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials.” Read More

But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.

The contents of a commercial building would be governed by fire codes, and would be fire rated, tested for flame spread, smoke density, etc. so we know that these other fuels would not have added to the temperature, but would have helped to starve the fire of oxygen.
Read More

"The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down."


Puffs Of Dust
CLAIM: As each tower collapsed, clearly visible puffs of dust and debris were ejected from the sides of the buildings. An advertisement in The New York Times for the book Painful Questions: An Analysis Of The September 11th Attack made this claim: "The concrete clouds shooting out of the buildings are not possible from a mere collapse. They do occur from explosions." Numerous conspiracy theorists cite Van Romero, an explosives expert and vice president of the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, who was quoted on 9/11 by the Albuquerque Journal as saying "there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse." The article continues, "Romero said the collapse of the structures resembled those of controlled implosions used to demolish old structures."

FACT: FACT: Once each tower began to collapse, the weight of all the floors above the collapsed zone bore down with pulverizing force on the highest intact floor. Unable to absorb the massive energy, that floor would fail, transmitting the forces to the floor below, allowing the collapse to progress downward through the building in a chain reaction. Engineers call the process "pancaking," and it does not require an explosion to begin, according to David Biggs, a structural engineer at Ryan-Biggs Associates and a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) team that worked on the FEMA report.

There were 47 solid one piece I-beams running up the middle of the WTC towers, how did the impact of floor falling upon floor collapse them? And at the same speed as all the other components of the building? This does not seem not plausible. The "puffs of dust" were dense pyroclastic like clouds, they behaved almost as a solid mass would, falling at nearly the same speed as a solid object.

Like all office buildings, the WTC towers contained a huge volume of air. As they pancaked, all that air--along with the concrete and other debris pulverized by the force of the collapse--was ejected with enormous energy. "When you have a significant portion of a floor collapsing, it's going to shoot air and concrete dust out the window," NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder tells PM. Those clouds of dust may create the impression of a controlled demolition, Sunder adds, "but it is the floor pancaking that leads to that perception."

enormous energy? I would like to see the math on that, exactly how much energy was expended to pulverize all the contents of the WTC, and crush 47 I-beams on end, and how much energy was available in the fuel and the gravity. When you talk in terms of enormous you kind of lose me.

Demolition expert Romero regrets that his comments to the Albuquerque Journal became fodder for conspiracy theorists. "I was misquoted in saying that I thought it was explosives that brought down the building," he tells PM. "I only said that that's what it looked like."

Romero, who agrees with the scientific conclusion that fire triggered the collapses, demanded a retraction from the Journal. It was printed Sept. 22, 2001. "I felt like my scientific reputation was on the line." But emperors-clothes.com saw something else: "The paymaster of Romero's research institute is the Pentagon. Directly or indirectly, pressure was brought to bear, forcing Romero to retract his original statement." Romero responds: "Conspiracy theorists came out saying that the government got to me. That is the farthest thing from the truth. This has been an albatross around my neck for three years."

"I only said that that's what it looked like." says Romero, alluding to how the collapses looked like a controlled demolition, and I agree, if it were a demolition it would look like that, symmetrical, and free falling, see that is the problem, asymmetric damage, and symmetrical collapse does not add up, neither does the speed of descent. Note that the pyroclastic cloud is descending with nothing but air resistance at the same rate of speed as the rest of the WTC and it's contents, and the 47 I-beams standing on end.

This is a simplified diagram of the support beams in the WTC, can you imagine 47 of the beams in the center all collapsing, and at such a rapid speed? See more about the WTC Construction

This section is more notable for what it does not discuss, than what it does. Conspicuously missing, is any discussion of the mode of failure of the core column to beam and core column to column connections. This most important topic has been almost totally ignored, with the presentation of a photo of a failed column to column connection in Figure B-6 being judged sufficient coverage (by those with something to hide). See more on the flaws in collapse theories.

Seismic Spikes
CLAIM: Seismographs at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, N.Y., 21 miles north of the WTC, recorded the events of 9/11. "The strongest jolts were all registered at the beginning of the collapses, well before falling debris struck the earth," reports the Web site WhatReallyHappened.com.

A columnist on Prisonplanet.com, a Web site run by radio talk show host Alex Jones, claims the seismic spikes (boxed area on Graph 1, inset) are "indisputable proof that massive explosions brought down" the towers. The Web site says its findings are supported by two seismologists at the observatory, Won-Young Kim and Arthur Lerner-Lam. Each "sharp spike of short duration," says Prisonplanet.com, was consistent with a "demolition-style implosion."

FACT: "There is no scientific basis for the conclusion that explosions brought down the towers," Lerner-Lam tells PM. "That representation of our work is categorically incorrect and not in context."

The report issued by Lamont-Doherty includes various graphs showing the seismic readings produced by the planes crashing into the two towers as well as the later collapse of both buildings. WhatReallyHappened.com chooses to display only one graph (Graph 1), which shows the readings over a 30-minute time span.

On that graph, the 8- and 10-second collapses appear--misleadingly--as a pair of sudden spikes. Lamont-Doherty's 40-second plot of the same data (Graph 2, above) gives a much more detailed picture: The seismic waves--blue for the South Tower, red for the North Tower--start small and then escalate as the buildings rumble to the ground. Translation: no bombs.

Translation: no bombs? Even if you are correct about the seismic data, (I doubt that you are) you still can not conclude that means no bombs, maybe no big bombs at the base of the WTC, but no bombs, no way. After all the pancakes are not shown in the seismic graphs are they? Bombs going off above ground would not necessarily cause significant ground shaking.

WTC 7 Collapse
CLAIM: Seven hours after the two towers fell, the 47-story WTC 7 collapsed. According to 911review.org: "The video clearly shows that it was not a collapse subsequent to a fire, but rather a controlled demolition: amongst the Internet investigators, the jury is in on this one."

FACT: Many conspiracy theorists point to FEMA's preliminary report, which said there was relatively light damage to WTC 7 prior to its collapse. With the benefit of more time and resources, NIST researchers now support the working hypothesis that WTC 7 was far more compromised by falling debris than the FEMA report indicated. "The most important thing we found was that there was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7," NIST's Sunder tells PM. "On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom--approximately 10 stories--about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out." NIST also discovered previously undocumented damage to WTC 7's upper stories and its southwest corner.

NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse, though assigning the exact proportion requires more research. But NIST's analysis suggests the fall of WTC 7 was an example of "progressive collapse," a process in which the failure of parts of a structure ultimately creates strains that cause the entire building to come down. Videos of the fall of WTC 7 show cracks, or "kinks," in the building's facade just before the two penthouses disappeared into the structure, one after the other. The entire building fell in on itself, with the slumping east side of the structure pulling down the west side in a diagonal collapse.

According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building's failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor. "What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors," Sunder notes, "it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down."

There are two other possible contributing factors still under investigation: First, trusses on the fifth and seventh floors were designed to transfer loads from one set of columns to another. With columns on the south face apparently damaged, high stresses would likely have been communicated to columns on the building's other faces, thereby exceeding their load-bearing capacities.

Second, a fifth-floor fire burned for up to 7 hours. "There was no firefighting in WTC 7," Sunder says. Investigators believe the fire was fed by tanks of diesel fuel that many tenants used to run emergency generators. Most tanks throughout the building were fairly small, but a generator on the fifth floor was connected to a large tank in the basement via a pressurized line. Says Sunder: "Our current working hypothesis is that this pressurized line was supplying fuel [to the fire] for a long period of time."

WTC 7 might have withstood the physical damage it received, or the fire that burned for hours, but those combined factors--along with the building's unusual construction--were enough to set off the chain-reaction collapse.

WTC 7? You can see sequential cutter charges going off in the video as 7 falls, free falls with nothing but air resistance. You can see a video on this page, Watch. We have captured on audio 2 fireman that heard the cutter charges going off, "boom boom boom boom boom", they said. We have Mr. Silverstein, the owner the the WTC complex, saying, "we gave the order to pull, and then we watched the building collapse. You can hear the firemen, and Silverstein on the sound file. (right click and save target as) high band width or low band width there is no copyright.
The lead FEMA investigator works for Controlled Demolition Inc., the same people who investigated the Oklahoma City bombing. Read More
No steel girder building had ever collapsed due to fire, until 9/11, and then 3 in one day?

Building 7 in a "controlled" free fall!

Explosions (squibs) happening on the outside of building 7, Watch a Video of these squibs.